BP's 'Beyond Petroleum' Slogan Becoming Toxic | Rance Crain - AdAge Adage Aleady a member? Sign in Get More From Ad Age Register to become a member today. You'll get the essential information you need to do your job better, including 7 free articles per month on Ad Age and Creativity Ability to comment on articles and creative work Access to 9 custom e-newsletters like Ad Age Daily, Ad Age Digital and CMO Strategy To get unlimited content and more benefits, check out our Membership page Register Now Want more Access, Content & Connections? We are glad you are enjoying Advertising Age. To get uninterrupted access and additional benefits, become a member today. Already a member? Log in or go back to the homepage . Hey, there. It looks like you're using an ad blocker. The news and features are funded in part by our advertisers. To support Ad Age and the industry we cover please either: BP's 'Beyond Petroleum' Slogan Becoming Toxic Oil Giant's Enthusiastic Embrace of Alternative Energy Opens It Up to Charges That It Neglected Key Business By Rance Crain . Published on May 03, 2010 .

Rance Crain I said it once and I'll say it again: British Petroleum should get off its high horse and concentrate on being a better oil company. Back in 2006, BP got in trouble after the disclosure that its Prudhoe Bay pipeline was corroded and leaking for many years because nobody was inspecting it. Related Stories BP Struggles to Hit Right Note in Response to Oil Spill After BP was forced to shut down the pipeline for repairs, a guy who wrote BP's "Beyond Petroleum" ads pronounced his disillusionment with the ads in a New York Times article. The author of the piece, John Kenney, said "I guess, looking at it now, 'Beyond Petroleum' is just advertising. It's become mere marketing -- perhaps it always was -- instead of a genuine attempt to engage the public in the debate or a corporate rallying cry to change the paradigm. Maybe I'm naïve." What must he think now? Back in those days, BP was "at one of the lowest points in its history; badly run, accident-prone and accused in the aftermath of a deadly explosion at its Texas City refinery of putting profits before safety," according to the Wall Street Journal.

The new regime, the Journal added, has "turned BP around, boosting production, cutting costs and significantly reducing on-the-job injuries." Last month, the new CEO was observing an irreversible "change of culture." And now the company is facing one of the most disastrous environmental breaches ever, right up there with the Exxon Valdez oil spill two decades ago. The new CEO apparently changed everything but the advertising. The problem is not that BP's ads didn't work, as John Kenney lamented, but they worked too well. Sure, the whole thing was "just advertising" that BP had lofty environmental ambitions, but it was advertising that, for better or for worse, BP was judged by. Yes, it was concocted to cut through the "corporate speak" of big oil companies, but BP itself bought into it a little too enthusiastically. "Beyond reality" might be a more appropriate slogan. By talking about all those other sources of energy it's developing, BP gives the impression that the oil business is no longer its first priority. As I said in 2006, "I wish BP still believed in the oil business ...

But the company was way out there, beyond petroleum, and I guess the oil business just wasn't cutting-edge enough to warrant its attention." Was BP too busy celebrating the U.S. Interior Department's endorsement of the wind farms off the Cape Cod coast that it didn't keep an eye on its leased oil rig on the Gulf of Mexico? That's the kind of criticism its advertising has opened itself up to. Look what happened the last time. Writing two days before Mr. Kenney's article, The Times' Joe Nocera said he was walking through an airport when he spotted a BP poster. "You know the kind I'm talking about. The letters BP in lower case type -- making them look somehow warmer and fuzzier. Like most BP ads, indeed like all BP marketing, it spoke of the company's commitment to the environment. "And here's what I thought when I saw it: 'Oh, yeah, right.'" Mr.

Nocera said if BP hadn't been so "holier than thou" in its marketing during the last few years, "I doubt that it would be getting hammered right now -- at least to this extent." "And if there's one iron-clad rule about marketing, it is that you had better be practicing internally what you are preaching to the world." Another ironclad rule also comes into play here: After every disaster, the response level (or lack thereof) gets factored into the next one. So because both local, state and federal government reaction to Hurricane Katrina were universally viewed as woefully inadequate, both BP and the federal government's reaction to the drilling rig fire and sinking are being measured by the same yardstick. And even though the new BP CEO has "dialed back on the Beyond Petroleum mantra," as the Journal put it, the company must still live up to the highest levels of environmental striving it has created for itself.

In this article: List of Company Slogans List of Company Slogans LIST OF COMPANY SLOGANS: · 3M: "Innovation"· Agere Systems: "How Communication Happens"· Agilent: "Dreams Made Real"· Airbus: "Setting the Standards"· Amazon.com: "…and You're Done"· AMX: "It's Your World. Take Control"· Anritsu: "Discover What's Possible· AT&T: "Your World.

Delivered"· ATG Design Services: "Circuit Design for the RF Impaired"· ATI Technologies: "Get In the Game"· BAE Systems: "Innovating for a Safer World"· Ball Corporation: "The Leader in Small Space and Rocket Systems"· BellSouth: "Listening, Answering"· Blackhawk: "Powering DSP Development"· Boeing: "Forever New Frontiers"· Bose Corporation: "Better Sound Through Research"· Bowers & Wilkins (Speaker Mfg.): "Listen and You Will See"· BP Microsystems: "Setting the Standard in Device Programming"· Cadence: "How Big Can You Dream?"· Canon: "Know How"· Cingular Wireless: "Raising the Bar" · Cisco Systems: "This is the Power of the Network.

Now."· Cirrus Logic: "Leading the Digital Entertainment Revolution"· Compaq (HP): "Inspiration Technology"· Cypress Semiconductor: "Driving the Communication Revolution"· Datel (C&D Tech): "Innovation and Excellence"· Dell Computer: "Get More out of Now"· DuPont: "The Miracles of Science"· EM Research: "The ultimate source for miniature frequency synthesizers"· Ericsson: "Taking You Forward"· Fiber-Span, LLC: "RF On Fiber"· Ford: "Built for the Road Ahead"· Fujitsu: "The Possibilities are Infinite"· General Dynamics: "Strength On Your Side"· General Electric: "Imagination at Work"· GigaLane: "Innovation and Excellence in RF & Microwave"· Griff Specialty Paper and Film: "Materials that Create Solutions"· Hitachi: "Inspire the Next"· Hewlett-Packard: "Invent"· Honeywell: "We are Honeywell"· IBM: "We Make IT Happen"· IDT: "Powering What's Next"· IFI: "The Power of Choice"· I.F.

Engineering Corp: "Your challenge is our progress" · Infineon: "Keep on Thinking"· Intel: "Intel Inside"· Intersil: "Technology at the Speed of Life"· ITT: "Engineered for Life"· JRC: "You Don't Need Wires to Communicate"· Keithley: "A Greater Measure of Confidence"· Kodak: "A Virtual World of Live Pictures"· Linksys: "At Linksys - We are making connectivity easier"· Linx Technologies: "Wireless Made Simple"· Lockheed Martin: "We Never Forget Who We're Working For"· MegaPhase: "Our Customers Connect With Us™"· Micrel: "The Infinite Bandwidth Company"· Micron: "The Future of Memory"· Mitsubishi Semiconductor: "Changes for the Better"· Motorola: "Digital DNA" "Hello.

Moto"· muRata: "Innovator in Electronics"· mWAVE Industries, LLC: "Your Partner In Antenna Technology"· National Semiconductor: "The Sight & Sound of Information"· NEC Corporation: "Empowered by Innovation"· Nokia: "Connecting People"· Nortel Networks: "Business Without Boundaries"· Orbital Sciences Corporation: "The Leader in Small Space and Rocket Systems"· Panasonic: "Ideas for Life" More From This User 'Beyond Petroleum' No More? BP Goes Back to Basics 'Beyond Petroleum' No More? BP Goes Back to Basics Saturday, 20 Apr 2013 | 12:00 AM ET CNBC.com SHARES Getty Images After a very public campaign to promote renewable energy, BP is inaugurating Earth Day as a markedly less "green" company — highlighting how certain business realities have run headlong into the once lofty expectations surrounding alternative energy.

In early April, Europe's second-largest energy company quietly announced that it was divesting of its wind power assets, part of what the company referred to as BP's "continuing effort to become a more focused oil and gas company and re-position the company for sustainable growth into the future." The decision followed BP's 2011 exit from solar power after 40 years in the business. Still, Mark Finley, general manager of BP's Global Energy Markets and US economics, said the company still has alternative energy bonafides to burnish. In an e-mailed response to questions from CNBC, he touted the company's involvement in biofuels and ethanol. He expects renewable energy to continue to grow in importance for company in the decades to come. "Alternative and renewable energies will be an important part of the energy mix moving forward, though the scale to which they contribute may grow at a slower pace than some predicted a few years ago," Finley said. In its most recent assessment of the global energy market, called the Energy Outlook, BP frankly acknowledged the growing importance of oil and shale gas development.

The company said both segments would account for "almost a fifth of the increase in global energy supply to 2030." In many ways, BP's retreat from solar and wind power reflects how alternative energy – despite making strides globally – has lost some of its clout as major economies move to exploit fossil fuels. (Read more: Finding an Edge in the Booming US Energy Market) It also raises questions about how BP – which once coined the phrase "Beyond Petroleum" as part of a corporate re-branding strategy – can sustain its once high-profile commitment to alternative energy. "It's undeniable that they have less assets to point to when they make a claim that they're backing the renewable energy sector," said Michel Di Capua, head of North American analysis at Bloomberg New Energy Finance. "On the solar side they had both manufacturing and development: They were making equipment and putting projects on the ground. They exited that entirely," Di Capua said. "It's clear that they're trying to gather cash and redeploy into core businesses. " As climate change has slipped lower on the public policy radar, major economies have embarked on a quest to exploit more natural resources. In particular, the U.S. is moving aggressively to tap domestic oil and gas resources.

That makes North American energy markets too attractive for oil companies to ignore, and puts pressure on BP to invest heavily more in fossil fuel exploration. "To the extent that natural gas remains abundant and prices in the U.S. remain low, it will create challenges to large scale deployment of renewables, due to the competition with gas in power generation," said BP's Finley. "However, because of policy support and what we see as the downward cost curve of renewable technologies, we believe alternative energy will be the fastest growing segment of the energy market across the globe," Finley added. "Importantly, this growth is coming from a very small base, as renewables represent just 2 percent of the world's energy supply today." Yet BP also has to acknowledge the dominance of fossil fuels. According to its energy outlook, BP remains the largest deep water lease holder in the Gulf of Mexico — the site of its infamous 2010 oil spill. The company has also expanded its presence inland, particularly in the Eagle Ford region of Texas.

(Read more: US Oil Moves Inland,Making Storms Less Disruptive) Although solar and wind technology have grown worldwide in the last year – by 42 percent and 19 percent, respectively, according to recent data from the International Energy Agency – government financial support for renewables has fallen sharply. That has forced companies like BP to rethink how much of their own capital they want to commit. In their heyday, the U.S. funneled a total of $29 billion to renewable fuel projects. The company's energy outlook said that alternative energy faces "a different set of challenges, the most pressing of which – and the key factor limiting growth – is the affordability of subsidies." Yet Bloomberg's Di Capua said BP's problems didn't necessarily spell doom for the entire sector. "This was a case of one big company investing in renewables,and now it's pulling back," he said. "I don't think there's a trend necessarily, just a particular set of circumstances for BP." Back to Petroleum | Foreign Policy Back to Petroleum Thanks to the unfolding catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico, the public is finally seeing through BP's decade-long greenwashing campaign. By Kate Sheppard Kate Sheppard is a staff reporter at Mother Jones.

May 3, 2010 A decade ago, the company then known as British Petroleum launched a multimillion dollar advertising campaign to rebrand itself as the greenest of oil giants. Since then, it has gone only by the initials "BP" and has popularized a new slogan: "Beyond Petroleum." The campaign launched with a $200 million public relations and advertising budget and a new logo featuring the now-ubiquitous green-and-yellow sunburst. Ten years later, the company still spends big on advertising, dropping $76 million on radio and TV ads touting its image in the United States just last year. The campaign has paid off for the company. A customer survey in 2007 found that BP had by far the most environmentally friendly image of any major oil company. That year, the "Beyond Petroleum" campaign also won the Gold Award from the American Marketing Association. The company reported that between 2000 and 2007, its brand awareness jumped from 4 percent to 67 percent and sales rose steadily. But those hundreds of millions of dollars worth of green branding can’t fortify the company against the environmental and public relations catastrophe unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico.

At least 210,000 gallons of crude are hemorrhaging into the Gulf each day after the April 20 explosion and subsequent collapse of BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig 50 miles off the Louisiana coast, a blast that killed 11 workers and injured 17 others. In a worst-case scenario for the spill, it could gush up to 6 million gallons per day. The spill is already well on its way to eclipsing the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster, which dumped 10.8 million gallons into Alaska’s Prince William Sound and stands as the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history. The spill has wiped out years of ad spending for the company — but it has also highlighted how disingenuous much of that advertising was. Despite all BP has spent on rebranding, the company hasn’t done nearly as much to move "beyond petroleum" as its campaign implies. In fact, BP has been turning away from investments in nonfossil energy, last year cutting investment in alternative sources from $1.4 billion to $1 billion. Weeks before the spill, BP announced that it was shuttering its solar manufacturing plant in Maryland.

The company brought in $73 billion in revenue in the first quarter of 2010, but only about $700 million of its business was alternative energy sources like wind and solar. The company has also spent a lot of time and money convincing political leaders that offshore drilling is clean, safe, and environmentally friendly — while at the same time actually fighting against safety measures that might have prevented the horror in the Gulf. Last September, David Rainey, a vice president at BP America in charge of Gulf of Mexico exploration, appeared before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to assure legislators that new technology enables "safe and reliable production" of offshore oil and gas and that "any release from our operations is unacceptable" and "rare." But the Deepwater rig lacked a remote-control shut-off switch , a backup system that would close the underwater well even if the rig above were destroyed, as happened two weeks ago. Norway and Brazil require this added precaution for rigs off their coasts, but it is voluntary in the United States.

In 2003, the Interior Department’s Minerals Management Service considered mandating the devices, but decided against it under pressure from oil companies that complained that the $500,000 devices were too burdensome. As recently as last fall, the company pushed back against new mandatory safety and environmental planning procedures. In a letter to Minerals Management Service, the division of the Department of Interior that overseas offshore development, dated Sept. 14, 2009, BP head of Gulf of Mexico production Richard Morrison criticized proposed rules that would require rig operators to develop and implement a Safety and Environmental Management System as "extensive, prescriptive regulations." "We believe industry’s current safety and environmental statistics demonstrate that the voluntary programs … have been and continue to be very successful," he wrote. The proposed rules have not been implemented. It’s also clear that BP underestimated the possible risks of an accident on the rig.

The plan filed with MMS in February 2009 for Deepwater Horizon stated that the company thought it "unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities." And if something were to happen, BP wrote, because of the distance to shore and planned response, "no significant adverse impacts are expected." BP’s worst-case scenario for an accident at the site was a leak of 162,000 barrels per day, which it said it could handle. MMS agreed, certifying at the time that it thought BP "has the capacity to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge." But even MMS knew that there were substantial, well-known problems with the "blowout preventers" that were supposed to seal the well after the blast. Now BP is scrambling to build domes to place over the gushing well, but that could take another six to eight days to deploy. The company didn’t have the containment vessels on hand because it "seemed inconceivable" that the blowout preventer would fail, BP spokesman Steve Rinehart told the Associated Press .

"I don’t think anybody foresaw the circumstance that we’re faced with now." But in fact, there have been plenty of warning signs in recent years that the company has little regard for the safety of workers or the environment. A 2005 explosion at the company’s Texas City refinery killed 15 workers and injured 170 others. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) fined the company $21 million for safety failures that led to the explosion, at the time a record for the agency. The Justice Department fined BP an additional $50 million. Despite assurances from BP that it would take comprehensive action to protect employees after the incident, the company continued to fail in that regard — prompting OSHA to set another $87 million fine. "Instead of living up to that commitment, BP has allowed hundreds of potential hazards to continue unabated," said Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis in announcing the new fine last December. The Department of Justice also fined BP $20 million for Clean Water Act violations stemming from a March 2006 incident in which 200,000 gallons of oil from a major oil pipeline spilled into Alaska’s Prudhoe Bay.

OSHA fined BP another $3 million just this March for safety violations at an Ohio refinery. The company has paid $485 million in fines in the United States alone in just the past five years. This, of course, is small change for a company that posted $5.65 billion in profits in just the first quarter of this year. But it highlights both the company’s lack of regard for worker and environmental safety, and the inadequacy of current enforcement mechanisms. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has pledged to "keep the boot on the neck" of BP to fulfill its responsibility in cleaning up the spill. But that boot should have been there a long time ago. It shouldn’t take a spill of this magnitude to remind us that we are still far from "beyond petroleum." No amount of rebranding can change that. Share + About BP | BP Global BP Global About BP About BP We provide fuel for transportation, energy for heat and light, lubricants to keep engines moving and petrochemicals used to make everyday items Sorry, you need Javascript enabled to view this video.

Loading video Fuel for transportation, energy for heat and light, lubricants to keep engines moving, and the petrochemicals products used to make everyday items Strategy and leadership Our goal is to be a focused oil and gas company that delivers value over volume. We are pursuing our strategy by setting clear priorities, actively managing a quality portfolio and employing our distinctive capabilities. Board and executive team BP's business model Our business model spans everything from exploration to marketing. We have a diverse integrated portfolio that is balanced across resource types, geographies and businesses adaptable to prevailing conditions. bp: Beyond Petroleum? bp: Beyond Petroleum? Sharon Beder Citation: Sharon Beder, 'bp: Beyond Petroleum?' in Battling Big Business: Countering greenwash, infiltration and other forms of corporate bullying, edited by Eveline Lubbers, Green Books, Devon, UK, 2002, pp. 26-32. This is a final version submitted for publication. Minor editorial changes may have subsequently been made.

Sharon Beder's Other Publications In 2000 the transnational oil giant BP Amoco rebranded itself as "bp: beyond petroleum." The rebranding was part of an effort to portray BP as an energy company, not just an oil company: one that incorporated solar energy in its portfolio and was willing to move away from oil. BP replaced its logo with a vibrant green-white-and-yellow sunburst named after Helios, the ancient Greek sun god.

The logo was meant to connote "commitment to the environment and solar power" and promote the new bp "as the supermajor of choice for the environmentally-aware motorist."[1] The lower-case letters were chosen "because focus groups say bp is friendlier than the old imperialistic BP," which stood for British Petroleum.[2] Along with its new name, bp launched a new line of petrol station in the US, UK and Australia called bp connect, intended to "reposition BP Amoco, an old-economy gas station giant, into a progressive, environmentally friendly retailer."[3] Petrol is just one of many items for sale at the high-tech stations, which are equipped with solar panels.[4] This was not the first time BP had revamped its logo and appearance to improve its environmental image. In 1989, as British Petroleum, it underwent a similar makeover. At a cost of about ?100 million it shortened its name to BP, redesigned its logo and refurbished its petrol stations to promote a greener, more socially responsible image. David Walton, head of public relations, said BP's image was "a major commercial and political asset.

Like any asset, it has to be managed and looked after." [1] [5] This earlier attempt at reputation management met with ridicule in some quarters. Jolyon Jenkins wrote in the New Statesman and Society that BP, a company responsible for clearing large areas of rainforest in Brazil, responded to a rise in environmental consciousness in the late 1980s with "a ?20 million 'reimaging campaign' in which it daubed all its property in green paint and advertised its annual report under the slogan 'Now We're Greener Than Ever.'" [6] In 1990 BP had to apologize for an ad campaign that claimed that its new unleaded petrol caused no pollution. [7] It seems the new bp still likes green paint: its petrol stations are to be painted in green, white and yellow to symbolize environmental responsibility and the sun. But BP only really had its green claims taken seriously in 1997, when it left the Global Climate Coalition (GCC), a group of 50 corporations and trade associations that had been claiming global warming was unproven and action to prevent it unwarranted.

In several speeches that year, CEO John Browne argued it was time to act to prevent greenhouse warming rather than continue to debate whether it would occur. [8] With this new stance on climate change, BP earned a reputation as an environmental progressive in an industry that largely refused to accept the likelihood of global warming. Browne received praise from environmental groups including Greenpeace. The question, though, is whether BP's move was an indicator of environmental leadership or a cynical attempt to manage its reputation. When BP left the GCC, it was receiving adverse publicity because of its activities in Colombia. The dramatic break with other oil companies on the issue of global warming provided a useful diversion as well as a much-needed refurbishment for a reputation under attack on human rights grounds. In 1997, amid favorable publicity about its stance on global warming, BP's share price and profit rose. BP's dangerous bedfellows In 1996 BP was accused of human rights violations in Colombia, leading to damaging media publicity in the UK. Its Casanare oil field has oil reserves valued at approximately $40 billion.

[9] The Colombian government has a poor human rights record, and both the police and army are held responsible for serious abuses of human rights including extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, torture and beatings. These official security forces are much feared by the people, as are the right-wing paramilitary forces, which appear to operate as death squads with government impunity, attacking local protesters, communities they suspect of being sympathetic to guerrillas, and people they deem socially undesirable, such as prostitutes and street children. Antigovernment guerrillas have also made enemies among the local population. Combined violence by government forces, the paramilitary and the guerrillas resulted in between 2,000 and 3,000 deaths in 1998 and 300,000 civilians being displaced from their homes. [10] BP's oil operations in Colombia have been a target for guerrillas who believe the oil industry should be nationalized. BP has installed several layers of preventative protection for its staff and installations. Firstly, it depends on the Colombian army, which created a special brigade of 3,000 soldiers for the purpose.

[11] In 1996, BP agreed to pay the Defense Ministry between $54 and 60 million over three years to augment the battalion with 150 officers and 500 soldiers. [12] BP also depends on the police force, which patrols the perimeter of its facilities; the company pays ?3 million a year for the service. [13] In 1992 BP hired the British firm Defense Systems Limited (DSL), which set up a subsidiary Defense Systems Colombia (DSC) for its BP operations. [14] According to World in Action's research, based on the testimony of former DSL officers and the police themselves, DSC has given Colombian police "lethal military training" since 1996. [15] But critics say this physical security has come at too high a price in human rights abuses. BP has been accused of forming its own army and of being associated with state repression. The military forces that protect its assets in Colombia are said to have connections with the right-wing paramilitary. And BP has been accused of hiring security people with past histories of human rights abuses and even murder.

[16] The heavy security had troubling implications for local people protesting about the environmental impact of BP's operations. The company admitted to early environmental damage, as a result of what Browne calls "honest mistakes" made before local regulations had been clarified rather than "willful and reckless mistakes." [17] BP's operations in Colombia have caused problems including deforestation, pollution of crucial water sources, landslides, earthquakes and ground contamination. World in Action pointed out, "The company which had gone into Colombia trumpeting the highest green standards was fined $215,000 ? the biggest-ever environmental fine in Colombian history." [18] "(M)embers of the local community involved in legitimate protest against the impact of the oil companies, including BP, have frequently been labeled subversive and subsequently been victims of human rights violations by security forces and their paramilitary allies," according to Amnesty International.

[19] Daniel Bland, a researcher with Human Rights Watch, said local people have testified that if there is "any kind of organized protest against BP in any way, the leaders of those protests are singled out for persecution for harassment and for death threats." Such threats are taken very seriously, as six members of one group, the El Morro Association, have been murdered since it began its campaign against damage done by BP to their road and their water supply. [20] In March 1997 BP was cleared of human rights abuses by a Colombian government inquiry. [1] However, according to Blowout Magazine, the Special Commission conducting the inquiry found the army brigade protecting BP's assets guilty of "civilian massacre, extrajudicial execution, rape, kidnap and torture." [21] Human Rights Watch also claims there have been "reports of killings, beatings and arrests committed by those forces responsible for protecting the companies' installations." [22] BP denies any responsibility for military repression of anti-BP protesters and says it has no control over the soldiers it hires to defend its Colombian sites. But Human Rights Watch argues that BP cannot avoid responsibility for human rights violations committed by government forces in defense of its own interests.

[23] Moreover, Richard Howitt, a British member of the European parliament, obtained internal Colombian government documents that stated BP had given the Colombian military photographs, videos and other information about peasant protesters concerned about environmental damage. The information had allegedly led to intimidation, beatings, disappearances and deaths. [24] A former DSC adviser also told World in Action "about a controversial proposal by DSC to set up a spy network in Casanare to target anti-BP protesters." [25] BP CEO John Browne responded, "We don't pass materials to the military...We have, as part of the licensing process, in order to produce evidence that we have had meetings on the environment, passed videotapes to the environmental department with the full knowledge and agreement of the community involved. That's the extent of it." [26] Human Rights Watch noted that when the contract between the Colombian military and BP came up for renewal in June 1999, the flow of funds was altered so that rather than paying the army directly, BP paid the state-owned ECOPETROL, which in turn paid the Defense Ministry. It continued making direct payments to the police.

[27] Old problem, new spin bp's activities in Colombia are not unusual: it uses armed security guards in several countries. Nor are human rights criticisms new to the company. BP operated in South Africa during the apartheid regime and was considered an enemy by the international anti-apartheid movement because it sold oil and gas to the military and cooperated with local refineries despite an international embargo. Its products were boycotted at the request of the NGO TransAfrica, which argued, "Without crude oil, the South African government would stop working. So BP is keeping the apartheid government alive." [28] bp now features its human rights position prominently on its website ( and its executives have given many speeches to promote it, some to NGOs. The site says that everywhere the company operates it establishes "clear ethical standards for ourselves and our contractors, ensuring that the whole of the local communities benefit from our presence." In countries where human rights are at issue, BP management claims it is better that it continue its operations. "Without development, and without business," a BP executive told Amnesty International, "fundamental human rights cannot be secured.

Far from being in conflict one is dependent upon the other." [29] Another executive told a 1997 Amnesty International conference in the UK that BP was "a force for good" in Colombia: "Surely we should not deny Casanare the development which is available to others." [30] In 1998 Browne claimed it had spend $25 million in Casanare since 1992 on the development of local businesses, social housing, infrastructure and training. This compared with $6 billion it had invested in its own business operations in Colombia. [31] Meanwhile, "a company's obligation to provide security for its staff is paramount." [32] But the company's arguments that its activities contribute to better political and civil rights are not borne out by history. There is little evidence that its years of operating in the Nigerian Delta, Southwestern Iran, Kuwait, Iraq, Papua New Guinea, Algeria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Aden have led to such progress. [33] Only the logo is green Certainly BP's record of environmental protection has been no better than other oil companies'.

[34] In 1991 it was cited as most polluting company in the US based on EPA toxic release data. And in 1992 Greenpeace International named it one of Scotland's two largest polluters. [35] Nor has it become a model company since its apparent environmental conversion in 1997. In 1999, it was charged with burning polluted gases at its Ohio refinery and agreed to pay a $1.7 million fine. [36] In July 2000 BP paid a $10 million fine to the EPA and agreed to reduce air pollution coming from its US refineries by tens of thousands of tons. BP's existing and proposed activities in Alaska have worried indigenous people and environmental groups. "Between January 1997 and March 1998, BP Amoco was responsible for 104 oil spills in America's Arctic," according to US PIRG research. [37] In 1999 BP admitted illegally dumping hazardous waste at its "environmentally friendly" oil field in Alaska and was fined $500,000 for failing to report it.

It paid $6.5 million more in civil penalties to settle claims associated with the waste's disposal. [38] bp has invested heavily in solar power and introduced a program to reduce its own greenhouse gas emissions. But despite its investment in solar energy, the company remains committed to ever-increasing production and usage of oil and gas. Director of Policy David Rice told the Global Public Affairs Institute in London, "We make no secret of our intention to grow our core exploration and production business and to continue our search for new sources of oil and gas." [39] And while bp has promised to reduce its own emissions, it does not accept the need to reduce those arising from the products it sells. Browne argues the company's contribution is relatively small: "If one adds up the emissions from all of BP's operations and from all the products we sell, it comes to around one percent of the total emissions from human activity." [40] Yet this is a huge amount for one company to be responsible for, and certainly a more important contribution than that of bp's own operations. By 1999 BP's emissions were greater than those of Central America, Canada or Britain, according to Corporate Watch.

[41] And BP's recent acquisitions mean the company is now thought to be responsible for about 3 percent of worldwide greenhouse emissions.[42] bp continues to explore for oil, often in environmentally sensitive areas such as the Atlantic Frontier, the foothills of the Andes and Alaska. bp's Northstar project involves the first undersea pipeline in the Arctic, and the Army Corps of Engineers calculates that "the total probability of one or more large oil spills...is approximately 11 percent to 24 percent" during its 15-year lifetime. [43] bp is seeking government permission to explore in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), one of Alaska's last remaining pristine wilderness areas, [44] through lobbying and donating to politicians and funding the lobby group Arctic Power. [45] President George W. Bush pledged to open the Refuge to oil drilling during his election campaign. Congress will vote on this later in 2001. A new industry front group has been set up to campaign for drilling to be allowed, the Energy Stewardship Alliance, but it is essentially Arctic Power under a new name. It is coordinated by Roger Herrera who also coordinated Arctic Power.

Herrera is a former Manager of Operations for BP's Sohio Alaska Petroleum Company, now retired, and in 1997 was a paid lobbyist for BP America. [46] BP has emphasized its solar investments while being attacked for its Arctic exploration. In March 1999 it launched its "Plug in the Sun" program based on its investment in solar energy and the installation of solar panels on gas stations around the world. Its ads said, "We can fill you up by sunshine" ? but it was still gas people were putting in their cars. For this program it was awarded a Greenwash Award by Corporate Watch. [47] In a similar satirical vein, Greenpeace USA gave CEO Browne an award for the "Best Impression of an Environmentalist." [48] An investment in image It seems bp is investing more in image than environment. Would a company spend hundreds of millions of dollars in solar investment just to enhance its reputation? Well, bp has already spent that much just on its "beyond petroleum" rebranding.

Research and preparation cost $7 million; bp planned to spend $200 million between 2000 and 2002 rebranding its facilities and changing signs and stationery and another $400 million on advertising its gasoline and pushing the new logo.[49] In the end, despite bp's rhetoric about social responsibility, triple bottom lines and enlightened self-interest, profits seem to count most. An oil company might invest in solar energy and admit that global warming should be prevented, but it will do all it can to ensure it can go on drilling for fossil fuels and expanding its markets for them. References 1 William Maclean, "BP Goes Greener with 'Beyond Petroleum' Rebrand," Planet Ark, July 25, 2000, ( 2 Brian Hale, "BP Goes Green, Solar, Connected," Sydney Morning Herald, July 26, 2000, pp. 25-6. 3 Kruti Trivedi, "BP Amoco Wants to Sell More Than Gas at its New Stations," The New York Times, July 25, 2000.

4 Andrew McKenzie and John Macleay, "Sun Rises on Greener BP," The Australian, July 26, 2000, p. 1. 5 Quoted in Philip Rawstorne, "BP Puts On New 'Public Face' to Meet Challenges of the 1990s," The Oil Daily, Feb. 6, 1989, p. 5. 6 Jolyon Jenkins, "Who's the Greenest?" New Statesman & Society, Aug. 17, 1990, pp. 18-20. 7 Julie Gozan, "BP: A Legacy of Apartheid, Pollution and Exploitation," Multinational Monitor, Vol. 13, No. 11, November 1992, pp. 26-30. 8 Ernest A. Lowe and Robert J. Harris, "Taking Climate Change Seriously: British Petroleum's Business Strategy," Corporate Environmental Strategy, Winter 1998 ( 9 Anon., "BP at War: Colombia," The Economist, Vol. 344, No. 8026, July 19, 1997, pp. 32-4.

10 Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, "Colombia Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1997," Department of State, 1998 ( Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, "Colombia Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1998," Department of State, 1999, ( 11 "Colombia: BP's Secret Soldiers," World In Action, ITV, UK, June 30, 1997 (text at 12 Cited in "Oil Companies Buying Up Colombian Army to Fight Pipeline Violence," Drillbits & Tailings, September 1996, p. 2; Human Rights Committee, "Colombia," Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 1997 ( 13 "Colombia: BP's Secret Soldiers." 14 Michael Sean Gillard and Melissa Jones, "BP's Secret Soldiers," Weekly Mail & Guardian, July 4, 1997 (web.sn.apc.org/wmail). 15 "Colombia: BP's Secret Soldiers." 16 "BP at War: Colombia," pp. 32-34.

17 Quoted in Polly Ghazi and Ian Hargreaves, "BP's Chief Executive is Making the Running on Green Strategy," New Statesman, Vol. 126, No. 4341, July 4, 1997, pp. 34-7. 18 "Colombia: How Green is Your Petrol?"; Athan Manuel, "Green Words, Dirty Deeds: A PIRG Expose of BP Amoco's Greenwashing," US Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) Education Fund, 1999; "Colombian Government Report Accuses BP of Involvement in Environmental and Human Rights Abuses," Drillbits & Tailings, Nov. 7, 1996, p. 4.

19 Amnesty International, "Colombia: British Petroleum Risks Fueling Human Rights Crisis Though Military Training," Amnesty International, 1997 ( 20 "Colombia: BP's Secret Soldiers." 21 "Colombia: The Role of BP," Blowout Magazine, January 1998, ( 22 Human Rights Watch, "Special Issues and Campaigns: Corporations and Human Rights," 1999 ( 23 Ghazi and Hargreaves, pp. 34-37; "Colombia: BP's Secret Soldiers"; Peter Eisen, "Group Pressures Oxy, BP on Human Rights," The Oil Daily, Vol. 48, No. 76, April 22, 1998, p. NA(1). 24 "BP at war: Colombia," pp. 32-34; Human Rights Committee. 25 "Colombia: BP's Secret Soldiers." 26 Quoted in Ghazi and Hargreaves, pp. 34-37. 27 Human Rights Watch.

29 Peter Sutherland, "Amnesty International Event,"1997 speech ( 30 Richard Newton, "Business and Human Rights," 1997 speech ( 31 John Browne, "The Case for Social Responsibility," 1998 speech ( 32 "BP's Submission to the UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee," BP, 2000 ( 33 James Bamberg, [*ITAL] The History of the British Petroleum Company. Volume 2 The Anglo-Iranian Years, 1928-1954 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994); James Bamberg, British Petroleum and Global Oil, 1950-1975. Volume 3 The Challenge of Nationalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). 34 "BP to Pay Damages in California Spill," Oil and Gas Journal, Vol. 93, No. 7, Feb. 13, 1995, p. 32; Manuel, pp. 11-12; "Salvage Will Show Toll from Tanker Spill," Business Insurance, Vol. 25, No.

30, July 29, 1991, p. 45; Gozan, pp. 26-30; "European Plants Dwarf US in Toxics," Chemical Marketing Reporter, Vol. 242, No. 5, Aug. 3, 1992, p. 5. 35Manuel, p. 12. 36Gozan, pp. 26-30. 37Manuel, p. 7. 38 Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman, "Enemies of the Future: The Ten Worst Corporations of 2000," Multinational Monitor, December 2000, p. 12. 39 David Rice, "Corporate Responsibility in the Marketplace," 1999 speech ( 40 E.J.P. Browne, "Energy Companies and the Environment Can Coexist," USA Today, Vol. 127, No. 2640, September 1998, pp. 54-56.

41Kenny Bruno, "Summer Greenwash Award: BP Amoco's 'Plug in the Sun' Program," Corporate Watch, 1999 ( 42Manuel, p. 8. 44Gozan, pp. 26-30. 45 SANE BP, "The Resolution," 2000 ( . 46 Energy Stewardship Alliance, "Energy Stewardship Alliance Formed; National Support for ANWR Exploration Grows", PR Newswire, March 21 2000, (biz.yahoo.com/prnews/010321/dcw030.html); Bob Costantini, "Where The Caribou Roam: The Arctic Oil Debate Heats Up", evote.com, March 2001, ( The Center for Responsive Politics, "Herrera, Roger Charles", 1997, ( 46 Quoted in Manuel, p. 11; Danielle Knight, “USA: Mixed Reaction to Oil Co's Earth Day Award”, Corporate Watch, (

Question: Which company uses the slogan "innovations beyond petroleum"?
Answer: B.P